CHAPTER VII.

ANNUAL MEETING.

Next to the Bible, Elder R. H. Miller held that the Annual Meeting was the highest authority to direct the church and the actions of individual members. Whatever might have been his own beliefs, which he always defended in the councils with great ability, yet when a decision was once made, he submissively yielded his own opinions until he had another opportunity in the same council to get decisions changed to what he considered right. A few brethren may have had as much formative influence on the decisions of Annual Meeting as he; but when once the decision was made, it is not too much to say that the church never had a man who so ably defended the positions of Annual Meeting as Elder R. H. Miller. His views on the position and function of Annual Meeting can best be learned from his own words:

"Some brethren have held that Annual Meeting is a legislative body. That is not correct. They might just as well call a council meeting a legislative body. The Annual Meeting and all church meetings are judiciary, merely as a court to decide upon all questions brought before it. The Annual Meeting has no power to originate bills and pass them as laws; but hear the case brought up from a local council, or District Meeting and decide it as a supreme court would do. Its

decisions are to our Brotherhood, as the decisions of the supreme court to the citizens of the United States; not congress to make laws, but a court to decide according to laws already made. So our Annual Meeting decides the case brought before it, according to the Gospel-the law God has made for the government of his church. All these cases that come up must be decided by somebody. Either each individual must decide for himself-that would be individualism; or each local church must decide it—that would be congregationalism; or each District Meeting must decide for itself that would be division at once on the principle of State rights; or the Annual Meeting must decide it according to the 15th of Acts.

"The church must have a rule, an order to govern it in everything. A ship on the ocean without a compass, without a mariner, carried by the wind and waves is soon wrecked and lost; so with the church without rule and order. Without God's Word and hand to direct its cause, it will soon drift with the current of fashion into all the ways of the world, and be lost in that vortex where there is no real difference between the church and the world. Many of the rules laid down in the Gospel are contrary to the carnal mind, but they are in perfect harmony with the spiritual mind when their object is fully understood. Though it is sad to see those who are not willing to be governed by the general order of the Brotherhood, given up to the world, yet we believe the church does right in separating from them. Because it is a truth plain to all men, that when a man belongs to a church, or any organization, and will not submit to its rules, and obey its gen

eral order, he ought to go out, because he can only cause division and trouble by staying in."

For twenty years he never missed an Annual Meeting and was a leading character in all of these conferences. There was not one of the many questions that came up for discussion but what he was ready to express his views upon, with the purpose of helping to decide it to the best interest of the church. He was a prominent member of nearly every important committee appointed to formulate plans and decisions upon which the General Conference could act. The work of these committees has had a lasting influence upon the history of the church. In the Conference itself, he was a power. Seldom did he become confused, but often by his cool-headedness, while others were excited, he helped to clear up the question for his brethren. This he did by critically and technically examining every point in the query presented. His clear arguments and simple words generally had their effect upon the decision. He was very resourceful in putting a motion in such a form that it would meet the desires of the Conference.

He was not the first to speak, but when he did speak, it was with power. Here, as in debate, his arguments were clearly and logically presented. When he finished, little remained to be said from his point of view. It has been said that he could present his side of the argument the strongest and yield the least to his opponent of any man in the Conference. Those who differed from him had to meet his arguments before they could expect a decision in their favor. He did not always secure a decision to his liking, but he knew

how to submit gracefully to the will of the majority. While he had advanced ideas on most subjects, he recognized the fact that some changes must wait till their appointed time. Unless it was a clear case that a change was right and for the best, he opposed it. His argument was that there can be no danger in staying awhile longer by the ways of the fathers, while there may be great danger in making a change before the proper time.

In the following pages we are giving a brief survey of some of the most prominent questions that were before the Conference in his day. He took an active part in discussing them and was in harmony with all the decisions, excepting one or two. He was a strong defender of the position that the church always took on such questions as war, temperance, secret societies, missionary and educational work. Some of the most important subjects have been discussed in other chapters.

FEET-WASHING.

The manner of observing the ordinance of feetwashing was one of the chief differences that caused the Old Order Brethren to leave the church. The general custom of the church for years had been the so-called double mode. This was performed by one member washing the feet of an indefinite number, and another member wiping the feet of those washed. Then two other members would continue the work as long as they desired. In practice, however, one member did not usually wash the feet of more than two or three. There were brethren in some places who felt